Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

New scattering zones in quantum speckle propagation

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Biphoton speckles acquire a new intermediate propagation regime, with one speckle axis frozen and the other growing linearly with distance.

desk verdict The intermediate regime is a real new idea, but the near-field 'square speckle' claim is a geometric non sequitur and needs fixing before publication. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.08408 v1 pith:CN6DPLPX submitted 2025-07-11 quant-ph physics.optics

Shaurya Aarav , S. A. Wadood , Jason W Fleischer This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phphysics.optics
keywords biphotonspecklequantumpropagationFresnelzonesspatialentanglementscatteringcorrelationsspontaneousparametricdown-conversionsum-differencecoordinatesshapetransition
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Speckle patterns from light scattered by a random medium usually fall into two classes: near-field speckles whose size is frozen, and far-field speckles whose size grows linearly with distance. This paper studies the same question for pairs of entangled photons and claims that the biphoton's two intrinsic length scales $\sigma_-$ and $\sigma_+$ create a third, intermediate Fresnel zone that has no classical analogue. In that zone the speckle size along the sum coordinate stays flat while the speckle size along the difference coordinate expands linearly with propagation distance $z$. The paper also claims that in the quantum near field the speckles are square instead of elliptical and remain unchanged during propagation. If correct, this gives correlation-based quantum imaging and sensing two independently controllable speckle axes and new distances at which to operate.

What carries the argument

The central object is the biphoton correlation function $\Gamma_z$ written in sum and difference coordinates: $\bar{r}_\pm = \bar{r}_1 \pm \bar{r}_2$ and $\delta r_\pm = \delta r_1 \pm \delta r_2$. The argument runs on the factorization $\Gamma_0 \approx R_0(\bar{r}_+,\bar{r}_-)\,\mu(\delta r_1,\delta r_2)$, which holds for a strong scatterer with Gaussian field statistics and an isotropic correlation width $\sigma_0$. Under the scale separation $\sigma_0 \ll \sigma_-,\sigma_+$, the Fourier transform of $\mu$ is either much broader or much narrower than $R_0$ as a function of the mean variables, which selects the near-field, intermediate, or far-field form of the Fresnel integral. The two length scales $\sigma_-$ and $\sigma_+$ of the input biphoton, inherited from the pump and crystal in SPDC, are what create the extra Fresnel zone.

What would settle it

Measure the two speckle widths $w_+$ and $w_-$ as a function of propagation distance for a scatterer whose correlation is deliberately anisotropic, with different widths along the two photon coordinates. The paper's factorization assumes a single scatterer width $\sigma_0$ along both coordinates, so an anisotropic scatterer should destroy the square near-field speckles and change the flat/linear split in the intermediate zone; if the square speckles and the split survive, the mechanism is not the one claimed. A weaker but also decisive check is to repeat the experiment with a weak scatterer of small phase variance, where the strong-scatterer factorization fails and the intermediate regime should disappear.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Starting from the Fresnel propagator for the biphoton correlation function $\Gamma_z = \langle \psi_z(x_1,x_2)\psi_z^*(x_1',x_2')\rangle$, the paper derives asymptotic forms in three axial regions separated by $z_{NF}=\sigma_0\sigma_-/\lambda$ and $z_{FF}=\sigma_0\sigma_+/\lambda$. In the near field $\Gamma_z \approx R_0(\bar{x}_+,\bar{x}_-)\,\mu(\delta x_+,\delta x_-)$, giving square speckles of width $\sigma_0$ that do not evolve; in the far field $\Gamma_z$ factorizes into Fourier transforms of the input intensity and of the scatterer correlation, giving elliptical speckles with widths $w_+=z\lambda/\sigma_+$ and $w_-=z\lambda/\sigma_-$; and in between, one width remains constant while the other grows linearly. Simulations and an SPDC experiment with an SLM-imprinted random phase and EMCCD coincidence detection show the square-to-elliptical transition. The paper states that the boundary $z_{FF}$ is only a length-scale estimate and that the exact transition depends on the functional forms in the full Fresnel integral.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the scatterer is strong enough and isotropic enough that the correlation function factorizes as an averaged intensity times a scatterer correlation of a single width $\sigma_0$, with Gaussian field statistics and $\sigma_0 \ll \sigma_-,\sigma_+$; if the scatterer is weak, anisotropic, or lacks that scale separation, the square near-field speckles and the flat-then-growing intermediate zone are not guaranteed to appear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In the near field ($z < \sigma_0\sigma_-/\lambda$), biphoton speckles are square with side $\sigma_0$ and propagate without changing shape, offering a propagation-invariant pattern for correlation imaging.
  • In the intermediate zone ($\sigma_0\sigma_-/\lambda < z < \sigma_0\sigma_+/\lambda$), the speckle width along the sum coordinate stays constant while the width along the difference coordinate grows linearly, allowing the two speckle axes to be controlled independently.
  • In the far field ($z > \sigma_0\sigma_+/\lambda$), the biphoton speckles become elliptical with widths $w_+ = z\lambda/\sigma_+$ and $w_- = z\lambda/\sigma_-$, recovering the known two-photon speckle result.
  • For SPDC sources operated in the far field of the crystal, the roles of $\sigma_-$ and $\sigma_+$ swap, so the same three-zone structure appears with the two axes exchanged.
  • The near-field and intermediate zones extend existing speckle-based techniques such as lensless imaging, depth sensing, and adaptive quantum optics to new propagation distances.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper, the square near-field speckle could be used as a propagation-based witness of spatial entanglement: a classical single-photon speckle has no two-axis square correlation footprint, so observing it after scattering would certify biphoton correlations.
  • Beyond the paper, the intermediate zone implies that a single scatterer can be characterized in both near-field and far-field regimes at the same distance, since one speckle axis samples the scatterer correlation while the orthogonal axis samples its Fourier content.
  • Beyond the paper, extending the same sum-difference separation to three- and four-photon states should produce multiple intermediate zones, one for each internal coordinate whose length scale separates from the scatterer correlation.
  • Beyond the paper, measuring the exact distance at which the flat width begins to grow could provide a quantitative characterization of the biphoton wavefunction, since the paper's boundary $z_{FF}$ is only a length-scale estimate.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the paraxial propagation of two-photon speckles generated by SPDC and scattered by a thin random phase screen. Using a Gaussian biphoton state with two length scales, σ− and σ+, the strong-scatterer factorization (2), and the Fresnel integral, the authors derive far-field and near-field forms of the biphoton correlation function and identify an intermediate propagation zone in which the sum-coordinate speckle width stays constant while the difference-coordinate width grows linearly. The claims are supported by numerical simulations and by coincidence-imaging experiments at four propagation distances. The main advertised results are a near-field regime with square, propagation-invariant speckles and a new intermediate Fresnel regime unique to biphotons.

Significance. If the central claims survive revision, the paper is a useful contribution to quantum speckle optics: it identifies a biphoton-specific intermediate Fresnel zone and supports it with numerical and experimental illustrations. The theoretical predictions are largely parameter-free: the speckle widths are determined by λ, σ0, σ±, with no constants fitted to the observed shapes, and the simulations use a standard angular-spectrum propagator. The experimental effort is substantial, with 1–2 million EMCCD frames per propagation plane. The main novelty, however, currently includes an unsupported near-field square-shape claim, and the experimental comparison is qualitative rather than quantitative.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II, Sec. III, Fig. 2(b)] The derivation of the near-field speckle shape does not support the claim of square speckles. Equation (4) gives Γz ≈ R0(¯x+, ¯x−) μ(δx+, δx−), and the only shape information in this near-field expression is the correlation function μ. The manuscript states that μ has the same width σ0 along both photon coordinates and concludes that the speckles are squares of width w+ = w− = σ0. This inference is a geometric non sequitur: equal widths in two orthogonal directions are also possessed by a circle, and for the Gaussian μ used in the simulations, μ(δr1, δr2) = exp[−(δr1^2 + δr2^2)/σ0^2], all level contours in the (δx1, δx2) plane are circles, not squares. The experimental autocorrelation in Fig. 3(f) is described as 'rectangular,' which is neither a square nor a circle, and no quantitative contour fit is provided. Because the abstract's headline claim includes 'speckles with a square shape that remain constant during propagation,' this unsupported shape conclusion is load-bearing. The authors should either derive a scatterer correlation function (or a coordinate transformation) that genuinely produces square contours, or revise the near-field shape claim to 'isotropic/circular' and discuss the square appearance as a visualization or threshold artifact.
  2. [Sec. II, Sec. III, Fig. 2(b)] The quantitative boundary of the new intermediate zone is not derived from the full Fresnel integral. The text defines z > σ0σ+/λ as the far-field condition and z < σ0σ−/λ as the near-field condition from a length-scale argument, and in Sec. III the authors state that the predicted transition at z = 27 cm is not observed because 'the transition zFF will depend on the exact functional forms...' of the scatterer correlation and input state. This is an explicit admission that the regime boundary is only an estimate. Since the central novelty is the existence and location of an intermediate Fresnel regime, the theory should provide either a controlled evaluation of Eq. (7) in that regime or a quantitative error estimate for the length-scale boundaries. As it stands, the intermediate regime is identified in simulations, but its predicted extent is not fixed by the theory, weakening the claim that the regime is predicted 'theoretically.'
  3. [Sec. IV, Fig. 3] The experimental demonstration is qualitative. No measured speckle widths w±(z) are extracted from the autocorrelation images and compared with the simulated curves of Fig. 2 or with the analytical near-field and far-field expressions. Without such a quantitative comparison, the experimental panels only illustrate a visual trend and cannot discriminate the predicted intermediate behavior from, for example, a smooth classical transition. A figure with extracted autocorrelation widths versus z, with uncertainties, overlaid on the theoretical curves would substantiate the 'experimentally' claim in the abstract.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors, including 'repectively' after Eq. (1), 'propgation' in Sec. IV, and 'propgation distances' in the experiment paragraph.
  2. [Sec. III] The text refers to 'Figures 1(b-d)', but Fig. 1 contains panels (b)–(e); the citation should be corrected.
  3. [Sec. II, Eq. (3); Fig. 2(a)] The label assignment for w+ and w− is inconsistent between Eq. (3), which states w+ = zλ/σ+ and w− = zλ/σ−, and Fig. 2(a), which states major axis w+ ∝ 1/σ− and minor axis w− ∝ 1/σ+. Since σ+ > σ− in the examples, these two assignments are incompatible; please reconcile the notation.
  4. [Supplement, Sec. VIII] The binary threshold of 0.7 used to measure speckle size is a free parameter; the sensitivity of the reported w± values and shapes to this threshold should be reported or discussed.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The intermediate-regime prediction is self-contained, but the near-field 'square speckle' claim reduces the output shape to the assumed equal-width isotropy of the scatterer correlation by construction.

  1. self definitional [Sec. II, Near-field paragraph following Eq. (4); reiterated in the Abstract ('speckles with a square shape')]
    "Since µ has the same width along both photon coordinates δr1, δr2, the speckles appear as squares of width w+ = w− = σ0."

    Eq. (4) gives Γz ≈ R0(¯x+, ¯x−)µ(δx+, δx−), where µ is the input scatterer correlation assumed to have the same width σ0 along both photon coordinates. The paper's only basis for asserting a 'square' shape is the equality w+ = w− = σ0, i.e., 'square' is being defined as equal widths along the two axes. That equality is a restatement of the assumed isotropic scatterer correlation, not a consequence of Fresnel propagation or of the level-set geometry of µ. For the Gaussian µ used in the simulations, the contours are circles, not squares, so equal widths do not imply a square; the prediction thus reduces to the input isotropy by construction.

full rationale

The central propagation derivation is otherwise self-contained: Eq. (7) is the full Fresnel expression, and the far-field (Eq. 3) and near-field (Eq. 4) limits follow from scale-separation arguments using the stated input parameters σ±, σ0, and λ, with no constants fitted to the observed speckle shapes. The intermediate zone is a genuine consequence of the full integral and is supported by simulations, and the far-field limit independently reproduces Ref. [18]. The paper's self-citations ([23]–[27], [31]) are used for coincidence-measurement methodology and for a caveat about the exact transition distance; none of these is load-bearing for the new regime classification. The one circular element is the near-field 'square speckle' claim: the paper equates the shape with the equal-width property of the assumed isotropic scatterer correlation, so this particular headline result is the input assumption renamed as a prediction. Because this square-shape claim is one of the two advertised headline results, the paper is partially circular, but the intermediate-regime physics stands independently.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No numbers are fitted to the predicted speckle shapes: σ−, σ+ and σ0 are physical inputs, and the regime boundaries follow from scale arguments. The main assumptions are explicitly stated in Sec. II and the Supplement: Gaussian field statistics, strong scatterer factorization, isotropic scatterer correlation, and scale separation. These are domain assumptions, not invented entities.

free parameters (1)
  • Autocorrelation binary threshold for speckle-size measurement = 0.7
    Used in Simulations (Supplement Sec. VIII) to convert smoothed autocorrelation into a binary mask before measuring speckle size. This hand-chosen threshold affects the quantitative widths in Fig. 2 but not the qualitative regime behavior.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Fresnel/paraxial propagation via transfer function h_z(r,x)=e^{-ik_0(r-x)^2/2z} applies to the biphoton field
    Used to write Eq. (5) and all subsequent expansions; standard result in Fourier optics (ref. [40]).
  • domain assumption Scattered biphoton field has Gaussian statistics
    Stated in Sec. II to connect field and intensity correlations; standard for thick/strong scatterers but not universal.
  • domain assumption Strong scatterer gives Γ0 ≈ R0(\bar r+,\bar r−) μ(δr1,δr2)
    Eq. (2), needed to separate the average biphoton intensity from the scatterer correlation function; requires the scatterer to dominate the phase statistics.
  • domain assumption Scatterer correlation is isotropic with the same width σ0 in both photon coordinates
    Stated after Eq. (2); drives the square near-field speckle shape. Real scatterers may have anisotropic correlations.
  • domain assumption Strict scale separation σ0 << σ−, σ+
    Assumed in Sec. II to define the three axial regions; if σ0 is comparable to σ±, the factorization (Eq. 2) and the region boundaries break down.
  • domain assumption Input biphoton state is Gaussian with widths σ− and σ+
    Eq. (1), used to compute explicit Fourier transforms; the authors note the specific Gaussian form is not essential, but the existence of two length scales is.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of New scattering zones in quantum speckle propagation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CN6DPLPX

@misc{pith2026250708408,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: New scattering zones in quantum speckle propagation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CN6DPLPX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.08408}
}
read the original abstract

Quantum speckles exhibit significantly richer behavior than their classical counterparts due to their higher dimensionality. A simple example is the far-field speckle pattern in 1D light scattering: classical light forms 1D speckles defined by the numerical aperture, whereas biphoton scattering depends in addition on the photon correlation length, forming 2D elliptical speckles. To date, the behavior of quantum speckles for shorter propagation distances has not been considered. We remedy this here by considering the paraxial evolution of two-photon entanglement at arbitrary propagation distances from an isotropic scatterer. We show, theoretically, numerically, and experimentally, that the two length scales of the biphoton introduce a new Fresnel regime between the conventional near and far fields. Further, we show that the quantum near field is characterized by speckles with a square shape that remain constant during propagation. In contrast, the intermediate regime can be engineered to have a constant speckle size along the sum coordinate but a linearly expanding speckle size along the difference coordinate, with a speckle shape that transitions from square to elliptical. The results merge quantum coherence with scattering statistics and suggest new regimes of operation for correlation-based quantum sensing and imaging.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.08408 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Simulation of biphoton speckles with propagation. (a) Simulation scheme. Biphotons scatter from an isotropic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Simulations of biphoton speckle size as a function of propagation distance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Experimental results. (a) Experimental setup. In the first half, biphotons created in a BBO crystal via Type-1 SPDC [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Wavefront correction of high-dimensional two-photon states via coherence-entanglement transfer

    quant-ph 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A two-photon source in a low-entanglement configuration measures the transmission matrix of a scattering medium, and the same correction then restores correlations of a high-dimensional entangled state.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    This result recovers the far-field speckle corre- lations obtained in [18], with elliptical speckles with widths w+ = zλ/σ+ and w− = zλ/σ− along their re- spective axes

    Far field: z > σ0σ+/λ Γz = CF[R0(¯r+, ¯r−)] 1 zλ (δx+, δx−) (3) × F[µ(δr1, δr2)] 1 zλ (¯x+, ¯x−) , where C is a phase factor and F denotes a Fourier trans- form. This result recovers the far-field speckle corre- lations obtained in [18], with elliptical speckles with widths w+ = zλ/σ+ and w− = zλ/σ− along their re- spective axes. The field of view is dete...

    work page

  2. [2]

    In this region, the bipho- ton speckle size depends only on the scatterer correlation function

    Near field: z < σ0σ−/λ Γz = R0(¯x+, ¯x−)µ(δx+, δx−) (4) This result is similar to the near-field relation derived for single photons in [15–17]. In this region, the bipho- ton speckle size depends only on the scatterer correlation function. Since µ has the same width along both photon coordinates δr1, δr2, the speckles appear as squares of width w+ = w− =...

    work page

  3. [3]

    scattering

    Intermediate field: σ0σ−/λ < z < σ0σ+/λ This regime does not exist for single-photon speckles, as they lack the internal degrees of freedom necessary for scale separation during propagation. III. SIMULA TIONS Here, we simulate the system shown in Fig. 1(a). In what follows, we keep a constant wavelength λ = 810 nm and scatterer correlation length σ0 = 44 ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Leendertz, Interferometric displacement measurement on scattering surfaces utilizing speckle effect, Journal of Physics E: Scientific Instruments 3, 214 (1970)

    J. Leendertz, Interferometric displacement measurement on scattering surfaces utilizing speckle effect, Journal of Physics E: Scientific Instruments 3, 214 (1970)

    work page 1970

  5. [5]

    I. M. Vellekoop and A. P. Mosk, Focusing coherent light through opaque strongly scattering media, Opt. Lett. 32, 2309 (2007)

    work page 2007

  6. [6]

    Bertolotti, E

    J. Bertolotti, E. G. Van Putten, C. Blum, A. Lagendijk, W. L. Vos, and A. P. Mosk, Non-invasive imaging through opaque scattering layers, Nature 491, 232 (2012)

    2012

  7. [7]

    O. Katz, P. Heidmann, M. Fink, and S. Gigan, Non- invasive single-shot imaging through scattering layers and around corners via speckle correlations, Nature pho- tonics 8, 784 (2014)

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    Antipa, G

    N. Antipa, G. Kuo, R. Heckel, B. Mildenhall, E. Bostan, R. Ng, and L. Waller, Diffusercam: lensless single- exposure 3d imaging, Optica 5, 1 (2018)

    work page 2018

Show all 43 references
  1. [9]

    Aarav and J

    S. Aarav and J. W. Fleischer, Using speckle correla- tions for single-shot 3d imaging, Applied Optics62, D181 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    Aarav and J

    S. Aarav and J. W. Fleischer, Depth-resolved speckle cor- relation imaging using the axial memory effect, Optics Express 32, 23750 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    Rafayelyan, J

    M. Rafayelyan, J. Dong, Y. Tan, F. Krzakala, and S. Gi- gan, Large-scale optical reservoir computing for spa- tiotemporal chaotic systems prediction, Physical Review X 10, 041037 (2020)

    2020

  4. [12]

    Freund, M

    I. Freund, M. Rosenbluh, and S. Feng, Memory effects in propagation of optical waves through disordered media, Physical review letters 61, 2328 (1988)

    1988

  5. [13]

    C. Sun, L. Waller, D. V. Dylov, and J. W. Fleischer, Spectral dynamics of spatially incoherent modulation in- stability, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 263902 (2012)

    2012

  6. [14]

    Bender, H

    N. Bender, H. Yılmaz, Y. Bromberg, and H. Cao, Customizing speckle intensity statistics, Optica 5, 595 (2018)

    2018

  7. [15]

    N. K. Metzger, R. Spesyvtsev, G. D. Bruce, B. Miller, G. T. Maker, G. Malcolm, M. Mazilu, and K. Dholakia, Harnessing speckle for a sub-femtometre resolved broad- band wavemeter and laser stabilization, Nature commu- nications 8, 15610 (2017)

    2017

  8. [16]

    J. W. Goodman, Speckle phenomena in optics: the- ory and applications(Roberts and Company Publishers, 2007)

    2007

  9. [17]

    Giglio, M

    M. Giglio, M. Carpineti, and A. Vailati, Space intensity correlations in the near field of the scattered light: a direct measurement of the density correlation function g (r), Physical review letters 85, 1416 (2000)

    2000

  10. [18]

    Gatti, D

    A. Gatti, D. Magatti, and F. Ferri, Three-dimensional coherence of light speckles: theory, Physical Review A 78, 063806 (2008)

    2008

  11. [19]

    Magatti, A

    D. Magatti, A. Gatti, and F. Ferri, Three-dimensional coherence of light speckles: experiment, Physical Review A 79, 053831 (2009)

    2009

  12. [20]

    Cerbino, Correlations of light in the deep fresnel re- gion: An extended van cittert and zernike theorem, Phys- ical Review A 75, 053815 (2007)

    R. Cerbino, Correlations of light in the deep fresnel re- gion: An extended van cittert and zernike theorem, Phys- ical Review A 75, 053815 (2007)

    2007

  13. [21]

    Peeters, J

    W. Peeters, J. Moerman, and M. Van Exter, Observation of two-photon speckle patterns, Physical review letters 104, 173601 (2010)

    2010

  14. [22]

    G. Soro, E. Lantz, A. Mosset, and F. Devaux, Quantum spatial correlations imaging through thick scattering me- dia: experiments and comparison with simulations of the biphoton wave function, Journal of Optics 23, 025201 (2021)

    2021

  15. [23]

    Karan, S

    S. Karan, S. Aarav, H. Bharadhwaj, L. Taneja, A. De, G. Kulkarni, N. Meher, and A. K. Jha, Phase matching in β-barium borate crystals for spontaneous parametric down-conversion, Journal of Optics 22, 083501 (2020)

    2020

  16. [24]

    Fedorov, Y

    M. Fedorov, Y. M. Mikhailova, and P. Volkov, Gaussian modelling and schmidt modes of spdc biphoton states, 6 Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 42, 175503 (2009)

    2009

  17. [25]

    Schneeloch and J

    J. Schneeloch and J. C. Howell, Introduction to the transverse spatial correlations in spontaneous parametric down-conversion through the biphoton birth zone, Jour- nal of Optics 18, 053501 (2016)

    2016

  18. [26]

    Reichert, X

    M. Reichert, X. Sun, and J. W. Fleischer, Quality of spa- tial entanglement propagation, Phys. Rev. A 95, 063836 (2017)

    2017

  19. [27]

    Defienne, M

    H. Defienne, M. Reichert, and J. W. Fleischer, General model of photon-pair detection with an image sensor, Physical review letters 120, 203604 (2018)

    2018

  20. [28]

    Reichert, H

    M. Reichert, H. Defienne, and J. W. Fleischer, Massively parallel coincidence counting of high-dimensional entan- gled states, Scientific reports 8, 7925 (2018)

    2018

  21. [29]

    Defienne, P

    H. Defienne, P. Cameron, B. Ndagano, A. Lyons, M. Re- ichert, J. Zhao, A. R. Harvey, E. Charbon, J. W. Fleis- cher, and D. Faccio, Pixel super-resolution with spa- tially entangled photons, Nature communications 13, 3566 (2022)

    2022

  22. [30]

    Bhattacharjee, M

    A. Bhattacharjee, M. K. Joshi, S. Karan, J. Leach, and A. K. Jha, Propagation-induced revival of entanglement in the angle-oam bases, Science Advances 8, eabn7876 (2022)

    2022

  23. [31]

    Brida, M

    G. Brida, M. Genovese, and I. Ruo Berchera, Experi- mental realization of sub-shot-noise quantum imaging, Nature Photonics 4, 227 (2010)

    2010

  24. [32]

    H. D. L. Pires, J. Woudenberg, and M. Van Exter, Statis- tical properties of two-photon speckles, Physical Review A 85, 033807 (2012)

    2012

  25. [33]

    Beenakker, J

    C. Beenakker, J. Venderbos, and M. Van Exter, Two- photon speckle as a probe of multi-dimensional entangle- ment, Physical review letters 102, 193601 (2009)

    2009

  26. [34]

    Defienne, M

    H. Defienne, M. Reichert, and J. W. Fleischer, Adaptive quantum optics with spatially entangled photon pairs, Physical review letters 121, 233601 (2018)

    2018

  27. [35]

    O. Lib, G. Hasson, and Y. Bromberg, Real-time shaping of entangled photons by classical control and feedback, Science Advances 6, eabb6298 (2020)

    2020

  28. [36]

    J. P. Dowling, Quantum optical metrology–the low- down on high-n00n states, Contemporary physics49, 125 (2008)

    2008

  29. [37]

    Giovannetti, S

    V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, L. Maccone, and J. H. Shapiro, Sub-rayleigh-diffraction-bound quantum imaging, Physi- cal Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics 79, 013827 (2009)

    2009

  30. [38]

    Defienne, W

    H. Defienne, W. P. Bowen, M. Chekhova, G. B. Lemos, D. Oron, S. Ramelow, N. Treps, and D. Faccio, Advances in quantum imaging, Nature Photonics 18, 1024 (2024)

    2024

  31. [39]

    Aaronson and A

    S. Aaronson and A. Arkhipov, The computational com- plexity of linear optics, in Proceedings of the forty-third annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing(2011) pp. 333–342

    2011

  32. [40]

    Mollow, Photon correlations in the parametric fre- quency splitting of light, Physical Review A 8, 2684 (1973)

    B. Mollow, Photon correlations in the parametric fre- quency splitting of light, Physical Review A 8, 2684 (1973)

    1973

  33. [41]

    Massar, F

    S. Massar, F. Devaux, and E. Lantz, Multiphoton cor- relations between quantum images, Physical Review A 108, 013705 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

    Hiekkam¨ aki, R

    M. Hiekkam¨ aki, R. F. Barros, M. Ornigotti, and R. Fick- ler, Observation of the quantum gouy phase, Nature Pho- tonics 16, 828 (2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    J. W. Goodman, Introduction to Fourier optics(Roberts and Company publishers, 2005). 7 SUPPLEMENT AR Y MA TERIAL This supplement gives more details on the theory, simulation, and experiment presented in the main text. VII. THEOR Y The evolution of biphotons with propagation ca...

    2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.